Weisselberg Indicted

[Nostra]

Says the guy who supports democratic socialists...

Says the guy that supports a lying con man, with a hooker wife.

Soon to be indicted.
Glorious days ahead.

Any. Day. Now.

 

[Winco]

Says the guy who supports democratic socialists...

Says the guy that supports a lying con man, with a hooker wife.

Soon to be indicted.
Glorious days ahead.

again, are you suggesting he has no rights? Please, admit your hate for the man. step out let's hear about he has no rights form you.

Yes sir, trump has rights.
American people have rights too.
Yes sir, I can't stand trump, I do actually HATE him. Yes, I HATE that man.

America (70+ %) can't stand (HATE) the ex president, trump.

trump has the right to receive a fair trial, which is coming.
trump has conned you RWI's for years, now he can be indicted.

 

[colfax_m]

Once again you argue Trump doesn’t have the same rights everyone else has.

Are you guys so stupid that you don’t understand the issue isn’t whether he fought the subpoena but that he claimed he has extra rights none of us have?

Yes, you are.

 

[colfax_m]

Here ya go, Clown.

You’re an idiot. This link has nothing to do with the subject.

 

[colfax_m]

yes, a NYC developer involved in lawsuits only happens with Trump......

More excuse making.

Do you guys not see how Trump owns you? Like, he just does whatever he wants and knows you idiots will make an excuse for him.

 

[colfax_m]

why did the courts agree with him then?

They didn’t. They rejected his argument as an assault on the foundations of the country and Vance eventually got his subpoena fulfilled.

 

[Nostra]

Once again you argue Trump doesn’t have the same rights everyone else has.

Are you guys so stupid that you don’t understand the issue isn’t whether he fought the subpoena but that he claimed he has extra rights none of us have?

Yes, you are.

No, he didn’t. He claimed the same right all Presidents have, Clown.

 

[Nostra]

Here ya go, Clown.

You’re an idiot. This link has nothing to do with the subject.

Yes, it does. The SC ruled Obama thought he was above the law.

I understand how links confuse a lying sack of shit like you since your constant lies prohibit finding any. Deal with it.

 

[colfax_m]

No, he didn’t. He claimed the same right all Presidents have, Clown.

He didn’t. He claimed rights no president has ever had. Nixon tried a similar argument for a different level of prosecution and failed.

No one seriously thought Trump’s argument would succeed. It was only a stall tactic.

 

[Nostra]

yes, a NYC developer involved in lawsuits only happens with Trump......

More excuse making.

Do you guys not see how Trump owns you? Like, he just does whatever he wants and knows you idiots will make an excuse for him.

Pointing out Trump still has rights as an American isn’t making excuses, Dumbass.

 

[colfax_m]

Yes, it does. The SC ruled Obama thought he was above the law.

It has nothing to do with complying with a criminal subpoena.

You don’t even understand the topic.

 

[Nostra]

No, he didn’t. He claimed the same right all Presidents have, Clown.

He didn’t. He claimed rights no president has ever had. Nixon tried a similar argument for a different level of prosecution and failed.

No one seriously thought Trump’s argument would succeed. It was only a stall tactic.

Link to this right he claimed to have that has you so Butthurt?

 

[colfax_m]

Pointing out Trump still has rights as an American isn’t making excuses, Dumbass.

This is why I ignore you. You keep chiming in without having any idea what you’re talking about.

 

[Nostra]

Yes, it does. The SC ruled Obama thought he was above the law.

It has nothing to do with complying with a criminal subpoena.

You don’t even understand the topic.

The comment was a President who thinks he is above the law, Dumbass. My linked demonstrated Barry did just that.

 

[Nostra]

Pointing out Trump still has rights as an American isn’t making excuses, Dumbass.

This is why I ignore you. You keep chiming in without having any idea what you’re talking about.

You are ignoring me? Apparently, you don’t know the meaning of the word.

Need some help, lil fella?

 

[struth]

If he thought he was above the law, he wouldn't of followed the Court's order. He made an argument just like any other person has a right to do, and made a similar argument that prior Presidents have made

His argument was that he was above the law.

If you think Obama made a similar argument, cite the case.

I literally just cited the brief...which is loaded with case law.

Here is the opinion by Obama arguing that he doesn't have to have his staff comply with Congressional oversight: https://www.justice.gov/file/30896/download

He was wrong of course.

Trump did however, win his case against the House that was trying to get his personal documents.

That is not the same argument.

That was a Congressional subpoena on executive branch material part of his official duties.

Trump fought a criminal subpoena on a private matter.

The difference is night and day.

People fight those types of subpoenas every day, Clown. Once again you argue Trump doesn’t have the same rights everyone else has.

Let's be honest....it's not limited to Trump...leftist argue that nobody outside of their party has the same rights, and moreover, they have extra rights. They are allowed to firebomb Courthouses, attempted to invade the White House, assault people, destroy property, burn churches etc....it's their right to do so because they feel they have been wronged.

 

[colfax_m]

They are allowed to firebomb Courthouses, attempted to invade the White House, assault people, destroy property, burn churches etc....it's their right to do so because they feel they have been wronged.

Strawman.

 

[struth]

If he thought he was above the law, he wouldn't of followed the Court's order. He made an argument just like any other person has a right to do, and made a similar argument that prior Presidents have made

His argument was that he was above the law.

If you think Obama made a similar argument, cite the case.

I literally just cited the brief...which is loaded with case law.

Here is the opinion by Obama arguing that he doesn't have to have his staff comply with Congressional oversight: https://www.justice.gov/file/30896/download

He was wrong of course.

Trump did however, win his case against the House that was trying to get his personal documents.

That is not the same argument.

That was a Congressional subpoena on executive branch material part of his official duties.

Trump fought a criminal subpoena on a private matter.

The difference is night and day.

It's very much the same argument.

It wasn't on material, but a person to come testify...Obama was wrong...but he made the argument.

Well Trump's case was two cases, he was right about the House's request, at least the Court agreed...and the Court disagreed on the Vance matter, he turned the documents over...but made similar arguments, as outlined in his brief, loaded with case law to support their argument which I provided.

Look, I get you are using adjectives given to you by leftist propagandist, and were unaware that the arguments aren't new, unique to Trump or anything that other Presidents, including your Dear Leader Obama have used.....it's just silly....that you continue to hold on to them even when confronted with the facts.

With that said, it's no different then you holding on to your silly belief that, any day now he'll be indicted.

It’s absolutely not the same argument. Obama argument was discussing separation of powers and executive privilege.

Trump was arguing that a state can’t investigate him for committing a crime in his personal life. No separation of powers argument. No executive privilege argument.

Geez dude...I provided a link to the brief filed by Trump...he argued seperation of powers...did you not even bother to read it?

no trump was not arguing that at all....he simply was arguing he can't forced to comply with a sub while President of the United States.

Why are you simply parroting these clear propagandist talking points when the actual brief was already provided for you? Why can't you accept reality?

 

[martybegan]

yes, a NYC developer involved in lawsuits only happens with Trump......

More excuse making.

Do you guys not see how Trump owns you? Like, he just does whatever he wants and knows you idiots will make an excuse for him.

The only thing Trump owns is your side, and you don't even see it.

 

[jc456]

America (70+ %) can't stand (HATE) the ex president, trump.

that's pure bullshit. thanks, you haven't spoken to 200,000 million people. no fking way on this planet. Now you're turretting me

but about 80 million voted for him. and that pisses you off.